When can we see the HQ-26 on board?
China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread
- Thread starter peace_lover
- Start date
- Status
That's an answer I don't know. The 2nd Type 055 ship, although it was already commissioned before, only had its combat capacity fully installed a few weeks ago, probably the HQ-26 that must have already left the development stage, it may be that it is installed on the first two ships of the class that came into service. It depends on the missile's development status, if the missile has finished its development, the integration must already be happening, if not yet, the missile must complete the development in the medium term (2-3 years) and already install the anti-ballistic capability of long range aboard the Type 055.
The Soviets (and their Russian successors) would in the event of active hostilities prioritize eliminating any ABM capable vessels near enough their waters to posed a threat to their nuclear forces with heavy strike groups such as Tu-26s and Oscar SSGNs, and likewise Chinese conventional forces (especially AShBM units) would also need to be just as proactive in doing the same.
The problem for the Russians is not just ships, but land-based systems as well. There is an Aegis Ashore system in Romania as well as in Poland. The two sites are equipped with a ground-based Aegis SPY-1 radar and 12 missile tubes for the SM-3 Block IB. The SM-3 Block IB has additional capabilities compared to previous versions of the SM-3 in identifying and tracking objects during flight.
Exactly for that reason, the Russians developed the Kinzhal (2000 km range) and this year, it seems that this year the Russians will install the Zircon missile (1000 km / naval version 500 km range) in Bastion systems giving the ability to launch hypersonic attack on land.
Aye, folks from other discussion boards I've been to had mentioned the same too, which is why it was incumbent for the Russians to have countermeasures and systems ready for deployment much as their Soviet predecessors would have done, albeit in a more cost-effective and scaleable fashion.
MIRVed DF-5B
... umm for all we know it does?
China has lots of missiles with MaRV. The US knows this, we know this, China even says this and China even performed a few MaRV tests right in front of several US ships and SIGINT platforms and aircraft for ASBM and several for inland SR/MRBM with MaRV. I think China is actually the only country to have done these for all observers to watch from space and the ASBM tests of DF-21 and DF-26 were available not only to US satellites to watch the whole show but also several of those previously mentioned platforms.
DF-41 is China's most advanced mobile ICBM.
DF-41 has MIRV or can be fitted with a variety of payload types and configurations.
So how could we suppose that China the country with some of the first MaRV tech and the highest sophistication of MaRV tech (after all China developed and fielded Anti Ship Ballistic Missiles with MaRV for over 10 years now) somehow doesn't have MaRV on DF-41. If it doesn't it surely isn't due to inability but DF-41 not being suitable for it. Or superior platforms for MaRV available.
Wasn't it China that was the first and only country in the world that performed a trans-global hypersonic flight? To deliver nukes, it wouldn't even need to only rely on MaRV DF-41. That is easy stuff like a phd in maths solving a simple partial differential equation.
1. DF-41 does have MIRV capabilities. Depending on the throw-weight and warhead, it may be able to carry 6-12 warheads.
2. DF-5s (and silo based missiles in general) can carry more warheads because they have a higher throw-weight.
- Status